jonesyd UE Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Capital One

OK, have done so. Did you have any more thoughts on the actual Cap One CCA I re-sent you? Are you sticking to your initial view?

I am afraid yes, it is enforceable and will stay that way! Bummer.

I don't know why they would fanny about with their SAR but that agreement looks fine mate - sorry. I would continue to blag it, nothing to lose really...

[jonesyd]

Re: Capital One

I am afraid yes, it is enforceable and will stay that way! Bummer.

I don't know why they would fanny about with their SAR but that agreement looks fine mate - sorry. I would continue to blag it, nothing to lose really...

Interesting. What are they up to with that SAR? I'm pinning my hopes on them having lost/deleted the (enforceable) CCA some time after they sent the original to me. Anyhow.

A side issue: if they are refusing to provide me with SAR data (arguing over the sig), does that put the account into dispute just as well as failing a s.78 request does? I mean, for the purposes of fending off DCAs demand for payments?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Capital One

Interesting. What are they up to with that SAR? I'm pinning my hopes on them having lost/deleted the (enforceable) CCA some time after they sent the original to me. Anyhow.

A side issue: if they are refusing to provide me with SAR data (arguing over the sig), does that put the account into dispute just as well as failing a s.78 request does? I mean, for the purposes of fending off DCAs demand for payments?

Yes, its in default if you say it is - they should give you time to read and absorb the data they have sent you/will send you. Basically YOU put it in dispute as you query the legitimacy and amounts....

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd saga

It is unenforceable, look at page 2 - there it starts by displaying the Prescribed terms as section(s) 2, 3 & 4 then it jumps to section 15 - this is clearly a recon all jumped onto one page.....

You cannot favour one creditor over another, and why the loyalty to one (JLP), versus another (M&S) when they are both issued by the same parent bank (HSBC) fails to register with me.....

This is however unenforceable.....

Received this morning from HFC bank (first time it has been them rather than JLFS): a long letter which, due to some eccentric grammar, looks like a hybrid cut'n'paste job. The highlights:

"I can conform that under the CCA I have fulfilled our obligations by supplying you with a copy of the signed credit agreement. Although the copy you have been provided with states Application, you will note in the signature box, that it states "this is a credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974" and by signing this you agreed to be legally bound by its terms."

"I acknowledge your comment that you feel the above account is unenforceable and; therefore, you do not owe any sums outstanding on the above account. Please be aware that the effect of unenforceability under the CCA and such unenforceability does not apply in this case, as it is to prevent a lender from enforcing the agreement in court: It does not render the credit agreement void."

"I realise that this may not be the response you were hoping to receive however; should you remain dissatisfied JLFS is obliged to advise you of your right to refer your complaint to the FOS, as this letter constitutes our final response."

Some interesting views on the law in there. Which response do you think, Nid?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd saga

Received this morning from HFC bank (first time it has been them rather than JLFS): a long letter which, due to some eccentric grammar, looks like a hybrid cut'n'paste job. The highlights:

"I can conform that under the CCA I have fulfilled our obligations by supplying you with a copy of the signed credit agreement. Although the copy you have been provided with states Application, you will note in the signature box, that it states "this is a credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974" and by signing this you agreed to be legally bound by its terms."

"I acknowledge your comment that you feel the above account is unenforceable and; therefore, you do not owe any sums outstanding on the above account. Please be aware that the effect of unenforceability under the CCA and such unenforceability does not apply in this case, as it is to prevent a lender from enforcing the agreement in court: It does not render the credit agreement void."

"I realise that this may not be the response you were hoping to receive however; should you remain dissatisfied JLFS is obliged to advise you of your right to refer your complaint to the FOS, as this letter constitutes our final response."

Some interesting views on the law in there. Which response do you think, Nid?

There was no facts about law that I seen, plus its hardly likely a DCA know the first thing about law so i'd not worry about it.

Their reply is simply confirming to you that you have a right to claim UE but it doesn't extinguish the debt, at no point have you ever claimed it would - muppets! You're telling them it's UE and as such you aint paying.

Basically they will hassle you for payment, but you ignore them until they respond with an enforceable agreement. So, you ignore this. No action necessary.

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd saga

There was no facts about law that I seen, plus its hardly likely a DCA know the first thing about law so i'd not worry about it.

Their reply is simply confirming to you that you have a right to claim UE but it doesn't extinguish the debt, at no point have you ever claimed it would - muppets! You're telling them it's UE and as such you aint paying.

Basically they will hassle you for payment, but you ignore them until they respond with an enforceable agreement. So, you ignore this. No action necessary.

Sorry, my sarcasm didn't translate very well there. When I said "interesting views", I meant "nonsensical views". Anyhow, my (amateur) analysis was the same as yours - the garbled letter seem to acknowledge only that accounts can become UE, but all that UE means is that a court will confirm it is UE if the OC decides to take it that far. During the interim, OC has the freedom of the court to hassle you all they like.

(This was HFC - parent of John Lewis FS - by the way, not a DCA.)

[jonesyd]

Re: the leaving

In a non-related development, my situation has changed. I will be leaving the UK in April. In all likelihood it will be permanent, but with occasional trips home. I know that if I wait 6 years, my UE accounts will become statute-barred, but part of me thinks it would be good to at least attempt to resolve my UE accounts with minimal F&Fs before I leave. After I leave, it will likely be impossible because for all practical purposes I won't be contactable by post, and I know they will never communicate with me by email.

Niddy, if I were to offer, do you think there's any chance of them going for it? I no longer have any property or assets in the UK, so it seems their options would be limited to expensive international attempts to track me down (if they choose to do that in the face of the agreements being UE). Is it worth bringing that to their attention, you think?

[Deepie]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

hi jonesyd
if i was in your shoes, go away and forget about it

[MustGetStraigh]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

hi jonesyd
if i was in your shoes, go away and forget about it

Have to say ... I agree!

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

Thanks guys. I must sound like I'm a neat freak, and I'm definitely not that.

And I'm thinking something like 5% as a F&F. Any more than that and the little neat I've got would be freaked!

The only other thing on my mind is that one occasionally hears of judgements (mistakenly) awarded in the absence of the defendant and also that such judgements can endure on one's "record" long after the Statute of Limitations has washed away the DNs and so on. And if I did find myself permanently back in the UK at some point in the future, fixing that would be a major hassle.

[Deepie]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

I do not think they will accept 5%. niddy may say different, just walk away if you have no assets i can not see a problem

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

I do not think they will accept 5%. niddy may say different, just walk away if you have no assets i can not see a problem

in2deep - I suspect you are right, but I'm interested to see what the reaction is. I know that they can sell it on for 10% to DCAs, but I'm wondering if they may possibly see the uselessness of this in that [1] it is UE, and [2] I won't be around to be hassled by DCAs.

Bird in the hand and all that.

Mind you, this is banks we're talking about, so I'm not holding out a lot of hope that they will favour sense over nonsense or use over useless...

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

Hiya

In a nutshell they will not accept such low offers, even in so far that you could tell them you're emigrating with no possible chance of recovery but still, they'd decline.

Regards to your credit file/history - depends where you move to, depends whether it will follow you. Now, if you move to another member state within the EU - presuming they adhere to Data Protection, then your file will link to your UK one if you apply for anything in the host country.

If you move to say USA then so long as you do not use the previous address you'll generally be ok. Regards to CCJ's, if they were issued whilst you were out of the country then you could apply to get them set-aside. They only last 6yrs as well, unless the claimant went back to court at the 6yr point and proved they'd done everything possible to locate you - most do not follow it through and the ccj just drops off. Its hard to prove that they have done everything possible to find you - therefore they must never know you've moved abroad. Basically it is reflects and is based around the same data sharing principles as the UK.

If I were you, i'd just pack up and go. Best of luck, forget this nonsense back here and start again - afresh, and learn from your past mistakes. Just get up and go - don't say a word (safest option).

making offers would waste both yours and the claimants time, as they will not accept such low figures.

[MustGetStraigh]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

If you're not planning to be back for years, ahem, would it matter? Even if you got a CCJ in your absence it would only stay on your record for 6 years. I'm not suggesting you avoid paying , but ....!

Edit - seen Niddy has already replied.

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd UE Diary

OK, thanks for the advice on that.

In that case I'll keep ploughing on with them until I leave on the off-chance they'll accept it is UE and close it down.

I'll be living in Asia for the next couple of years, but ultimately I will settle back in the EU, but probably not permanently until a few years after that. Either way, I don't plan on ever borrowing again.

I'll get my UK mail re-directed (to another address in the UK) by Royal Mail for 1 year after I leave, so no doubt I'll have a stack of DCA mail to catch up on each time I return to the UK!

My UK phones will both be disconnected when I leave, so that will be a dead end for them.

The OCs have email addresses for me, and I'd be happy(!) to keep the conversation going with them that way, but as they have never used them I am assuming they never will. Do you think it is worth notifying them, by registered letter, on my last day in the UK, that henceforth I will only be available via email?